the ironic thing is that the most pro-gay president in history (admittedly, a low bar), the man with a long record of being unshakably pro-choice, the man the "Christian" right is hell-bent on removing because he's somehow destroying what it means to be an American, is also by far the candidate with a most exemplary personal and family life measured against even the most hard core evangelical of standards.

disagree all you want with him politically. the Obamas are the embodiment of a liberal, secularist (despite, or, rather, perhaps in part of their expansive, inclusive Christianity), modern, inclusive 21st century "family values."

He should really stay away from NH- it seems to make him..um..nuttier than usual

Manchester, N.H. -- You might say Rick Perry courted the youth, but not the whole youth, in a campaign appearance at a New Hampshire college.

Speaking at Saint Anselm on Tuesday, he appealed to students who will be at least 21 before Election Day to vote for him.

As for those younger than 21, he merely asked them to work hard on his behalf.

It turns out Perry didn't know or had forgotten that the voting age in America is 18.

The flub caused some whispers in the crowd.

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's Arizona state chairman defended him against allegations that he had a 13-year affair with Atlanta businesswoman Ginger White.

Lori Klein, an Arizona state Senator, told CBS News that she has known him for 12 years and he's "never been anything but a gentleman -- and I am not an unattractive woman." She added that in politics, "we want a virgin to do a hooker's job."

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's Arizona state chairman defended him against allegations that he had a 13-year affair with Atlanta businesswoman Ginger White.

Lori Klein, an Arizona state Senator, told CBS News that she has known him for 12 years and he's "never been anything but a gentleman -- and I am not an unattractive woman." She added that in politics, "we want a virgin to do a hooker's job."

but i'm mostly pointing out the hypocrisy of "pro-family" (by which we mean anti-gay, anti-choice) political rhetoric and how it measures with reality, as compared by pro-gay, pro-choice and also "pro-family" political rhetoric and how that measures with reality.

cases in point: Cain and Gingrich. these are men with messy, messy personal lives. and yet they believe that gay people choose to be that way, that there should be a federal amendment to the constitution to prevent gay people from creating families, and that women should be forced to bear unwanted children. all of this is to win over the "pro-family" groups.

and look at their lives.

and, to be totally fair, i personally don't care who Gingrich and Cain fuck outside of their marriages. if there's one woman, there's four; if there's four women, there's twenty-four. so long as it's legal and consensual, it's none of my business. just don't go around pretending that kicking gays and crusading against reproductive freedom is somehow pro-family, or that being inclusive and pro-woman is somehow anti-family.

however, that's not the world we live in, post-Lewinsky. it's the right wing that has made the "character" of a president an issue, so you live by the sword you die by the sword.

it was put beautifully thusly (and, as i read, earlier in the thread):

It's also the sanctity of marriage stuff. If that isn't hypocrisy I don't know what is.

You really have to walk the walk and not just talk the talk on that one, if you're going to do it in order to deny other people the right while you are breaking the vows yourself. It's their business only as far as that line of hypocrisy. It's the lying about it too.

but i'm mostly pointing out the hypocrisy of "pro-family" (by which we mean anti-gay, anti-choice) political rhetoric and how it measures with reality, as compared by pro-gay, pro-choice and also "pro-family" political rhetoric and how that measures with reality.

cases in point: Cain and Gingrich. these are men with messy, messy personal lives. and yet they believe that gay people choose to be that way, that there should be a federal amendment to the constitution to prevent gay people from creating families, and that women should be forced to bear unwanted children. all of this is to win over the "pro-family" groups.

and look at their lives.

and, to be totally fair, i personally don't care who Gingrich and Cain fuck outside of their marriages. if there's one woman, there's four; if there's four women, there's twenty-four. so long as it's legal and consensual, it's none of my business. just don't go around pretending that kicking gays and crusading against reproductive freedom is somehow pro-family, or that being inclusive and pro-woman is somehow anti-family.

however, that's not the world we live in, post-Lewinsky. it's the right wing that has made the "character" of a president an issue, so you live by the sword you die by the sword.

"You people?" I can only speak for myself, and I was a child during Clinton's time, so don't clump me in with whoever you're trying to.

I've never liked the term "pro-family," as it implies one side isn't. But social conservatism includes not just the two things you mentioned (on which, by your standard, Obama is only 1 for 2 ), but issues like education and the sexualization of American culture, where I believe conservatives have the much stronger position.

By the way, I agree with you on gay marriage and abortion in extreme cases. But when you say that Obama- issues aside- has a better personal life and family life than any other candidate, I really don't know what you're trying to say or why. Because if you really believe that, there's a congresswoman from Minnesota I'd like you to meet, among others.

but issues like education and the sexualization of American culture, where I believe conservatives have the much stronger position.

You're going to have to really explain this one...

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2861U2

By the way, I agree with you on gay marriage and abortion in extreme cases. But when you say that Obama- issues aside- has a better personal life and family life than any other candidate, I really don't know what you're trying to say or why. Because if you really believe that, there's a congresswoman from Minnesota I'd like you to meet, among others.

I don't know what really goes on/has gone on in the Obama marriage, nobody does. I want to believe in it but it's ultimately just as doubtful as any other just because only they can know. Hate to say that but I think it's just the truth.

The husband and father aspect of him is the most admirable aspect, in my opinion. For that reason I'd feel very disappointed if anything came out, but nothing surprises me anymore.

"You people?" I can only speak for myself, and I was a child during Clinton's time, so don't clump me in with whoever you're trying to.

i was using "you people" to describe the GOP in general, and particularly the religious faction of the party, which has decreased in power since the Bush presidency.

Quote:

I've never liked the term "pro-family," as it implies one side isn't. But social conservatism includes not just the two things you mentioned (on which, by your standard, Obama is only 1 for 2 ), but issues like education and the sexualization of American culture, where I believe conservatives have the much stronger position.

but the political manifestation of "pro-family" politics is opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage. i am generalizing, and it might not be fair to you on an individual level, and that's right of you to point that out. but i do think it's fair to ascribe that position to the GOP.

i actually spend a lot of time on the NOM website poking around, and it shocks me how the best way to "promote" a "marriage culture" is to bar gay people from it, and not support programs and education for people who are already married or who wish to be. the same thing can be said of pro-life groups -- they seem more pro-birth than pro-child, at least when it comes to the political change sought by the GOP in the name of these groups.

Quote:

By the way, I agree with you on gay marriage and abortion in extreme cases. But when you say that Obama- issues aside- has a better personal life and family life than any other candidate, I really don't know what you're trying to say or why. Because if you really believe that, there's a congresswoman from Minnesota I'd like you to meet, among others.

i'm mostly talking about Gingrich and Cain, who are presently in the news right now.

i agree that the Bachman's have done wonderful things for foster children.

can't say that Marcus Bachman's "clinics" are at all helpful to, say, the people he's told to pray the gay away.

I'd never heard of Deace, but that doesn't mean anything since I've never heard of half the radio and TV names people throw around in here, left or right. I did find the appeal to King David analogies pretty funny though.

I think the flip-flopper image is more of a problem for Romney than his faith. I don't know that he really reverses his positions more than lots of other prominent politicians, but the stony-faced air of utmost seriousness with which he pronounces everything doesn't help when saying stuff that completely contradicts what was said with equal affected gravity earlier. As is often true of policiticans who get stuck with the flip-flopper label. Obviously, there are those for whom his faith categorically rules him out, but I think for the most part those types wouldn't find Romney conservative enough anyway regardless of his faith.

Obama only has to thank Romney for the blueprint for 'Obamacare' and that will be it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BVS

Exactly, one cheats because of his love for the country.

The other stops cheating for the love of his country.

Who would you rather have for President?

He should have cheated on his wife and divorced her when she was stricken with cancer.. He'd be set right now..

The Wall Street wing will not let anyone get in the way of Romney. He's their man. Newtie is going down next. As will anyone else who pops up as the front runner between now and June.